7 Comment

Wow. So 2045 Harvard sold at lot value for $65/sf. This may be a new high-water mark for land in the “Free Heights”.
The 4300 s.f. new build is listed at $1.65M. At what price point does a large house stop being considered a McMansion and start being considered an actual mansion?

@ Angostura – I don’t think the “Mc” in McMansion refers to size. I think it refers to cost/price, and where that price falls on the income/wealth distribution curve (aka – is attainable to large numbers, like McDonalds). For example, a 4,300 sq/ft house selling for $300k in Cypress would be a McMansion. The same home selling for $1.65 million in the Heights is probably a mansion. The same home selling for $4.0 million in River Oaks would certainly be a mansion.

We really live in a city where a charming home like 2045 Harvard is considered a tear-down (I’m going from the photo only). If it’s true, it’s Twilight Zone crazy.
Is there any other city where this is happening? Is there any end in sight?
I realize it’s free enterprise and out with the old and all that, and I understand it, and honestly, I don’t care that much either way but.
It’s just bizarre.

Angostura – I think maybe a house is considered a real mansion when it is not crammed on a too small lot and actually has at least a yard? I don’t know any more.

Like “literally”, “decimate” and “nonplussed”, the term McMansion has evolved in meaning. It once meant a large but inexpensive home, usually in the suburbs, accessible to a family with a middle class income.
Among a certain type of internet commenter, however, it now means: “house whose size offends my sensibilities”, regardless of price, quality or location.

@Danogris, I took a walk-through of 2045 Harvard to assess it for materials salvage. The house hadn’t been properly maintained for some time, and it would have been a total gut job to save.

When it comes to a poorly maintained 1k sqft house on a 6600 sqft Harvard St and builders are paying $65 psf for the dirt… economics dictate the wrecking ball is nigh.

I live right in the area and at numerous tidy ~1k sqft bungalows have changed hands intact in the last year or so.. a house 1 block north of comparable size is actually getting a full reno as I post this. Things are not so bleak.

When the property taxes exceed the amount of gross rental possible on a bungalow, it usually becomes imperative to sell to the developers who caused the property values to rise in the first place. I am not a TEA party sympathizer, but something needs to be done about this manner of taxation.